← Models

Model profile

Gemini 2.5 Pro

Googledeveloper
2025-03-25release date
#118 / 312overall rank
40eval lineages

Evidence summary

Gemini 2.5 Pro has an estimated overall rank of #118; its 90% source-sensitivity interval is #64–#182. Its behavior-only rank is #126; company governance moves the combined estimate to #118. Published evidence spans 40 evals and 7 of 7 behavior components. Its strongest relative result is SpeciEval (belief_animal_sentience, #1 of 113); its weakest is DelusionEval (sycophancy_prevalence_pct, #16 of 16).

Compare this model

Only models sharing at least one published sub-eval are listed.

Official and reference links

Published eval results

Rank is within that sub-eval. Black marks the observed result; the grey dot marks the value implied by the global rank. Values stay on each source’s native scale.

Eval / sub-evalRankValueDistributionSource
AA-Omnisciencehallucination_rate#265 / 3300.9089Source ↗official
AIRBench 2024 Safety Scenariossafety_scenarios#30 / 800.736Source ↗official
Alignment Leaderboardcorrigibility#9 / 244.34Source ↗official
Alignment Leaderboardhonesty#16 / 243.502Source ↗official
Alignment Leaderboardnon_manipulation#13 / 243.46Source ↗official
Alignment Leaderboardrobustness#16 / 243.28Source ↗official
Alignment Leaderboardsafety#13 / 243.827Source ↗official
Alignment Leaderboardscheming#11 / 243.789Source ↗official
Anthropic Agentic Misalignment — blackmailmisaligned_action_rate_pct#14 / 1695Source ↗official
Anthropic Agentic Misalignment — corporate espionagemisaligned_action_rate_pct#14 / 16100Source ↗official
Anthropic Agentic Misalignment — lethal actionmisaligned_action_rate_pct#8 / 1090Source ↗official
Arena Factuality — Search Arena (factuality-only weighting)factuality_bt_rating#7 / 301217.0Source ↗official
Arena Factuality — Text Arena (factuality-only weighting)factuality_bt_rating#18 / 1121460.0Source ↗official
BrokenMathsycophancy#3 / 937.5Source ↗official
BullshitBench v2clear_pushback_rate#63 / 1060.2Source ↗official
CAIS Risk Indexagent_red_teaming#40 / 4591.4Source ↗official
CAIS Risk Indexbioweapons_assistance#46 / 5094.1Source ↗official
CAIS Risk Indexhle_overconfidence#39 / 5172Source ↗official
CAIS Risk Indexmachiavelli#38 / 4795.3Source ↗official
CAIS Risk Indexmask#38 / 5344.3Source ↗official
CAIS Risk Indexpolitical_manipulation#6 / 3437.3Source ↗official
CAIS Risk Indextextquests_harm#15 / 5015.9Source ↗official
Confabulationsconfabulation_rate#7 / 524.95Source ↗official
DelusionEvaldelusional_prevalence_pct#14 / 1664.1Source ↗official
DelusionEvaldiscourages_harm_prevalence_pct#11 / 1620Source ↗official
DelusionEvalfacilitates_harm_prevalence_pct#15 / 168.9Source ↗official
DelusionEvalrelationship_prevalence_pct#15 / 1640.8Source ↗official
DelusionEvalsycophancy_prevalence_pct#16 / 1637.6Source ↗official
Emergent Collusionhigh_illegality_game_rate#7 / 130.39Source ↗official
Enkrypt AI Safety Leaderboardbias_attack_non_success_rate#35 / 24138.85Source ↗official
Enkrypt AI Safety Leaderboardcbrn_attack_non_success_rate#201 / 24179.17Source ↗official
Enkrypt AI Safety Leaderboardharmful_attack_non_success_rate#190 / 24145.37Source ↗official
Enkrypt AI Safety Leaderboardtoxicity_attack_non_success_rate#128 / 23996.02Source ↗official
FlagEval Safety and Valuesa1_qualified_rate#3 / 1884.87Source ↗official
FlagEval Safety and Valuesa2_qualified_rate#4 / 1881.19Source ↗official
FlagEval Safety and Valuesa3_qualified_rate#11 / 1886.5Source ↗official
FlagEval Safety and Valuesa4_qualified_rate#4 / 1890.01Source ↗official
FlagEval Safety and Valuesa5_qualified_rate#2 / 1874.97Source ↗official
FORTRESSaverage_risk_score#47 / 4961.68Source ↗official
FORTRESSover_refusal_score#8 / 481.58Source ↗official
HalluVerse-M3 Hallucination Recognitionhallucination_recognition_accuracy#4 / 1476.26Source ↗official
HELM Safetyanthropic_red_team#18 / 800.995Source ↗official
HELM Safetybbq#18 / 800.964Source ↗official
HELM Safetyharmbench#53 / 800.654Source ↗official
HELM Safetysimple_safety_tests#58 / 800.97Source ↗official
HELM Safetyxstest#3 / 800.987Source ↗official
HUMAINE Trust, Ethics and Safetytrust_ethics_safety_score#4 / 5429.16Source ↗official
Humanity's Last Exam RMS calibration error (Scale Labs)calibrationError#19 / 3971Source ↗official
LLM Ethics Benchmarkscore#3 / 586.1Source ↗official
MACHIAVELLIdeception_relative_random_pct#39 / 5095.3Source ↗official
Manager Coercion Benchcoercion_ladder_depth#29 / 339Source ↗official
Manager Coercion Benchfabrication_rate#14 / 1567Source ↗official
MASKlying_probability_pct#35 / 5345.63Source ↗official
MuPPET Contextual Privacymultiparty_contextual_privacy_score#1 / 760.86Source ↗official
PHAREbias_resistance_diagnostic#52 / 660.3652Source ↗official
PHAREhallucination_resistance_diagnostic#37 / 700.7482Source ↗official
PHAREharm_resistance_diagnostic#42 / 700.9218Source ↗official
PHAREjailbreak_resistance_diagnostic#53 / 670.3867Source ↗official
PropensityBenchscore#14 / 1479Source ↗official
RealityTest — Text AI-Identity Disclosuredisclosure_probability#14 / 170.128Source ↗official
Reward Hacking Benchmarkintegrity_score#8 / 1395.4Source ↗official
Shelleducation_jsr#3 / 140.418Source ↗official
Shellfinance_jsr#6 / 140.4Source ↗official
Shellmanagement_jsr#5 / 140.502Source ↗official
Social Welfare Function Benchmarkfairness#17 / 190.444Source ↗official
SOSBenchbiology_pvr#10 / 230.354Source ↗official
SOSBenchchemistry_pvr#11 / 230.342Source ↗official
SOSBenchmedicine_pvr#10 / 230.492Source ↗official
SOSBenchpharmacology_pvr#7 / 230.634Source ↗official
SOSBenchphysics_pvr#12 / 230.466Source ↗official
SOSBenchpsychology_pvr#7 / 230.294Source ↗official
SpeciEvalbelief_animal_sentience#1 / 1137Source ↗official
SpeciEvalland_animal_4ns#71 / 1134.65Source ↗official
SpeciEvalsea_animal_4ns#55 / 1134.72Source ↗official
SpeciEvalspeciesism#3 / 1131.05Source ↗official
TrustLLM contemporary collapsed applicationtrustllm#2 / 80.63Source ↗official
Vectara HHEM Factual Consistencyfactual_consistency_rate#28 / 9493Source ↗official

Values evaluations

Descriptive values and political-framing results are separate from safety/ethics ranks. Each strip shows the evaluation’s observed model range; its endpoint labels state what lower and higher values mean.

UGI Political Values

DimensionValueDistribution
Political Lean-23.8
Government47.8
Diplomacy69.7
Economy45.6
Society63.8

Moral Trolley Arena